Reports - United Nations Development Programme

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
programmes where systemic UNDP restrictions
against direct implementation by the UNDP
(mandated by the Executive Board) require it to
channel funds through other implementing agencies,
even where it itself is a recipient of partner funds for
programme implementation. This has raised
programme implementation costs and introduced
unnecessarily complicated implementation structures.
The ADR Evaluation Team therefore believes that
Country Offices should have more leeway to use
direct implementation modalities.
Mobilising and Managing Resources: From the
early 1990s, core programme funding (i.e., UNDP’s
own resources) has diminished significantly and an
increasing number of the UNDP’s activities have had
to mobilise financial support from other donors and
from the Government. The relatively large volumes
of project funds implemented outside the UNDP’s
core thematic focus have limited its capacity to pursue
core thematic areas of work. Future mobilisation of
programme resources will need to focus on the core
thematic areas where the UNDP has a substantive
comparative advantage.
UN Coordination: Coordination of UN agencies
and their activities has long been a big challenge for
the UN system. Turkey’s recent experience has been
no exception. The new instruments of Common
Country Assessment (CCA) and UN Development
Assistance Framework (UNDAF) were too broadgauged,
unfocused and costly, and had a limited
impact on the effective day-to-day cooperation by
UN agencies in Turkey. A new, action-oriented
approach that is focused on Turkey’s EU accession
and MDG agenda is now underway. This will help
orient the UN agencies in a more visibly common
strategic direction.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FUTURE
This Report concludes that the UNDP stands at a
crossroads in Turkey. For about five decades, the UNDP
has supported the country on its turbulent path to
development and progress. Over the last ten years in
particular, the UNDP has made significant contributions
in key human development areas, such as strengthening
local governance and helping to reduce regional
disparities, and working to build gender and
environmental awareness and capacity. Now the UNDP
has to decide what its future role in Turkey is, on what
lines of business and operational modalities to
concentrate, and how to rebuild its own resource base,
which is under serious stress.
The ADR Evaluation Team has concluded that there
clearly continues to be a significant role for the UNDP
in Turkey. This conclusion was supported by repeated
and consistent comments by interlocutors met during the
mission. The challenge is now to focus on the UNDP’s
comparative advantages, and to continue the new,
action-oriented approach towards the Turkey EU
accession and MDG agenda. To make this engagement
productive and sustainable, the ADR proposes the
following set of recommendations for the UNDP and its
partners in Turkey:
Build systematically on the core message of the
UNDP’s new mission statement:
“UNDP works in Turkey for democratic governance and
growth without poverty, in support of EU accession and
for the achievement of the MDGs.”
Focus on the five established core business lines of the
UNDP in Turkey: governance, poverty, environment,
gender, and disaster and crisis response. Use this
focus as a selectivity screen when assessing all new
initiatives, whether these emerge from partners in the
country or from UNDP Headquarters.
Leverage the UNDP’s experience in participatory
and transparent capacity building for local
Governments and communities and in dealing with
regional disparities, both in Turkey as well as in other
countries. Combine the UNDP’s international
standing, capacity and experience with the strong
national capacity and networks that it has built over
the years in Turkey.
Systematically pursue the sustainability and scalingup
potential of UNDP programmes and projects. A
very important part of this effort will be systematic
monitoring and evaluation.
Ensure the establishment and maintenance of major
and sustained partnerships, especially with the
Government, the EU, and the UN Country Team
(UNCT). Continue reviving the collaborative efforts
of the UNCT, focusing on a clearly defined set of
common goals.
The authorities should stand ready to meet with the
UNDP at a high level and at regular intervals to
ensure that new UNDP programme priorities are in
line with national priorities, that commitment to
agreed priorities is sustained and that systemic issues
impeding effective implementation on both sides
are addressed.
The Government needs to commit its own resources
7